correct. Copernicus believed that the planets revolved around the sun. This challenged the view of Ptolemy from ancient times, who held that the earth was the center of the universe. Thus, the Copernican view relegated the earth to the same status as all other heavenly bodies. No longer could it be held, as it had been by all philosophers since Aristotle, that the movement of earthly objects was completely different from those in space. Galileo's further experiments on moving bodies made clear that we can study objects on earth scientifically just as we can jthose in space. If mathematic regularity can be applied to the movement of natural forces on earth as well as to those on other planets, then science could explain acts of nature and answer problems in engineering. This new way of viewing the universe would thus affect a wide range of human concerns.
The discoveries of Isaac Newton were even more revolutionary. He developed a mathematical explanation for the motion of all bodies and called it the law of gravitation. This law stated that all matter is mutually attracting. Newton was even able to calculate precisely the intensity of the attraction because he discovered that it depended upon the mass of the bodies and their distance from one another. Now it could clearly be demonstrated that stars and grains of sand were governed by the same laws. In Newton's view of
the universe, the motion of all objects could be explained and even predicted. The universe was a giant machine run by physical laws. This meant that there was no room for religious explanations of how the universe worked. Thus it appeared that ["the new science would challenge all Greek and [_Christian thought.
Thematic Thematic Interp. Dev Transition Interp. Evidence Dev. Trans interpretation
r~ The new developments in astronomy and |_mechanics established the basis for modern experimental science. In the late seventeenth century, societies for the scientific study of nature grew up in many parts of Europe. Such groups as the Royal Society of London for Promoting Natural Knowledge spread the new thought and conducted experiments. They were part of a new secular outlook that challenged the religious beliefs of Europe. The new and the old explanations of the world seemed headed for inevitable conflict in their attempts to win the minds of people. What were the essential differences between these two world views and what was the outcome of their struggle?
and of the ways in which divine intervention ruled history. Alternative explanations were regarded as the product of ignorance of church teaching or as the work of the devil. On the other hand, science (or natural philosophy as it was then called) held that mathematical logic and tested experience (experimentation) were the only ways to discover truth. Any understanding of the world that was the result of religious experience or church authority was the product of superstition. Newtonian mechanics described a system in which all matter acted according to predictable physical rules. There was no need or even room for God in such a system, and observation and experimentation uncovered no sign of His influence.
The Catholic Church of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, while it had to share power with secular rulers, was still strong both theologically and politically. In many areas it had the power to enforce its views. The scientists ran great risk if they used their new ideas and discoveries in ways that threatened religion. Galileo was prohibited by church authorities in Rome from writing about or even discussing the religious implications of the Copernican view of heavenly motions. Eventually, the Inquisition forced him to renounce the theory publicly, and his book on the subject, Dialogueon the Two Chief Systems of the World, was banned.
Thematic Thematic Evid and Interp Dev. Trans. Evid Development
The disciplinary authority of the church (and of those governments influenced by it) was augmented by the fact that many of the new scientists had been ardent believers in the Christian faith. Either because they feared the power of the church and conservative governments or because they wished, despite their discoveries, to retain their religious convictions, these men _sought some kind of theoretical compromise.
Newton, for example, continued to believe in God. While the operation of his system required no divine presence, he strongly believed that only God could have been the creator of such a _mechanically perfect universe. As a result of these factors, the theoretical clash between _science and religion was somewhat muted.
The Evolution of Scientific Thought! Deism One of the most widespread ideas among the new thinkers was a view that combined the new scientific understanding with a belief, however _limited, in God. This idea was known as deism. Deists believed in a "natural religion," one that people arrived at by reason rather than faith. Since it was not reasonable that the universe created itself, men like John Locke, Samuel Clarke, and John Toland held that God was its creator. While He did not actually intervene
once He had set the great machine in motion, God had initially endowed human beings with reason and moral sensibility. By using these faculties, people could learn both to understand nature and _to build moral communities.
Thematic Thematic Evtd and Evid. and InterpDev. Trans. Interp. Dev. Interp
“ There were, of course, still major differences between Christianity and deism, and the deists were strong critics of the established church. They dispensed with the particulars of "orthodox Christianity because these were the result not of reason but of superstition. The hierarchy of the church was also unnecessary since if all people could reason, all could come to an understanding of God on their own. Nevertheless, deists did believe that the truths uncovered by scientific reasoning were the _handiwork of the "Divine Architect."
The Evolution of Scientific Thoughti Empiricism Other natural philosophers found the deist compromise unacceptable. These men tended to become agnostics or atheists. Some of these skeptics held that if mechanical laws explained all things, then they also explained people's belief in God. What believers had taken as miracles, these men explained either as figments of the imagination or else as misunderstood natural phenomena such as earthquakes or lightning. If the evidence of God's presence was unfounded, they held, then there was no
[^reason to assume His existence.
I- Certain of these skeptics extended the |_material explanation of things to the workings of the human mind. The philosophy of the British empiricists, in particular, maintained that the mind had no thought content of its own. It merely received sensory information and then made logical connections among the things observed.
Since the world is governed by material laws, the impressions that reality makes upon the mind are regular and logical. To perceive truth, all one has to do is observe. If people believe in God, it is because their minds have been filled with superstitious notions which get in the way of understanding the truth as recorded by the senses. This school of empiricism believed that if people were taught to reason from nature rather than from authority, all could come to understand material reality, which was all there was to know.
Empiricism was a radical doctrine because it held that all people were capable of understanding the whole of reality and did not need to depend upon political or religious leaders to guide them. Even more radical were those thinkers who were complete materialists and who not only explained thought as material in origin but also described human beings as just another piece of matter, with no different or higher properties. To these _thinkers, if the mind merely registers sensory rimpressions, then it, too, is nothing more thana machine. Such materialist philosophers as La Mettrie described people as nothing more than a material arrangement of bones, muscles, and nerves. Human thought was merely a particular combination or arrangement of these material elements. This conception eliminated not only the need for God but for any system of morality.
As a result, La Mettrie preached hedonism, the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake, as a completely acceptable way of life. This view of morality was supported indirectly by the reports of explorers who brought home from their scientific expeditions stories about the unusual social customs of far-off primitive peoples.
The conclusion drawn by many scientifically minded persons was that morality was culturally taught and, therefore, relative.
regularity? Only the impressions of our senses. Hume questioned the reliability of sensory impressions, attacking the foundations of empiricism itself. He argued that we have no way of being certain that the things we perceive are real. All we know is the perception itself. If we cannot know things which are outside our minds, then the causal connections we make between events (the rising and setting of the sun, the bouncing ball) are only habitual connections.
Cause and effect is an unprovable assumption.
The Return Toward Nonmaterial Thought
With the new science now as dependent upon faith (in sensory impressions) as the old religion, the ground was prepared for a reconciliation.
This was accomplished by the work of Immanuel Kant and Jean Jacques Rousseau.
Kant's Critique of Pure Reason established a new position from which to view the interaction of mind and material reality. Kant held that there were two kinds of mental processes; one kind is observation via the senses, and the other is a priori. A priori is the innate ability of the mind to order and reflect upon sensory impressions. While he agreed with Hume that we cannot know what is outside our minds, he contended that, because the ability of the mind to- organize experience is consistent and universal, we can be certain that our thinking is real and
that it is understandable to others. Paradoxically, while we cannot know external reality, we can know our minds. If the contents of our minds are real, then all our thought,
_both rational and spiritual, is real. Once again, there is room for belief in the nonmaterial.
It was Rousseau who reintroduced the nonmaterial and, in a sense, religious element into philosophical thinking. He did so by treating people's sense of right and wrong not as the result of religious teaching but as a basic human impulse. He held that the mind could not only reason, it also could feel. People had real emotions—love, hate, fear, pleasure—they were not mental machines. To Rousseau, thinking and feeling were both essential human qualities and were bound to each other.
Rousseau felt that some of people's strongest feelings were religious ones and that these were not inferior to the reasoning aspect of the mind. Of course, religion for Rousseau was not that of the church with its elaborate rituals or that of the deists to whom God was nothing more than an expert watchmaker. Rousseau's God was present in all natural things, those untouched by the corrupting influence of organized religion or any aspect of modern civilization. Rousseau believed that the conscience of man—the least contaminated part of him—was the best guide toConclusion
Rousseau brings us to a point where thought is free to trust itself and to be both scientific and moral. Unreasoning faith and faithlessness are both rejected.
We nave seen how the initial clash between science and religion led some scientific thinkers to attempt a synthesis and led others into a godless and eventually purposeless world. Furthermore, we have traced scientific thinking back toward acceptance of nonmaterial, nonrational ways of thought. Thus the undermining of the Christian world view by scientific thinking was paralleled by an evolution of such thinking itself and in ways that illuminated the enduring strength of moral and religious thought.
We have come a long way from the contest between Galileo and the church over the ideas of Copernicus. Today most people combine acceptance of the Copernican universe and much other scientific knowledge with some kind of religious or moral teaching. What seemed in the seventeenth century as a life and death struggle between contradictory ways of thought has turned out to be a standoff and has led to ways of thinking undreamt of by the original antagonists.
What to Footnote. Footnotes give the source of the facts and opinions that appear in your paper. If you quote, paraphrase, or summarize from your research materials, you must say where the original information can be found. This is done so that the reader can check the accuracy of your statements, judge the bias and credibility of your sources, and carry out research of his or her own. On occasion, you may also want to use footnotes to make comments that supplement or qualify statements in your text.
A question that always troubles students is which statements in a paper need to be footnoted. There are no hard and fast rules concerning the use of footnotes. A professional scholar’s criteria will be different from those of a student or amateur researcher. For the student writing a fifteen- to thirty-page term paper, three types of statements should be documented: (1) direct quotations,
controversial facts or opinions, and (3) statements that directly support the main points made in the paper.
All direct quotations must be footnoted. Controversial facts or opinions are those that not all of your sources agree on. If you state that most slave masters in Mississippi were kind to their slaves, and you know from your research that there are authors who strongly dispute this, then you must footnote that statement. A fact or opinion is also controversial if it is something with which the average reader would disagree. For example, you may have found that all your sources agree that Vikings visited the New World long before Columbus. However, if most people believe that Columbus was the first European to see the New World, then it is necessary to show your reader the source of your information with a footnote. Finally, statements of fact or opinion that directly support main points should be footnoted. If your subject is the Protestant Reformation, and you treat nationalism as a major factor in the break with Catholicism, then your references in the text to nationalist forces should be footnoted. On the other hand, if you treat the wealth of the Catholic Church as a very minor factor, then your references to that need not be footnoted.
The number of footnotes to use is another thorny problem. Some papers have more factual or controversial material than others and thus need more footnotes. As a rule of thumb, if your paper has quite a few pages without any footnotes, then you are
probably not documenting as much as you should. On the other hand, if you are writing five or more footnotes per page, you may be overdoing it. There is no such thing as the rightnumber of footnotes, but a twenty-five-page paper might contain anywhere from fifteen to seventy-five footnotes, depending on the subject.
How to Write Footnotes.When you decide that a footnote is necessary, place a number at the end of the sentence that contains the information to be documented. Occasionally, you may want to footnote two different things in the same sentence. In this case, place each number right after the word or phrase you want to footnote. Some writers place the number at the end of a paragraph rather than at the end of a sentence. This is proper only if the footnote refers to the material in the paragraph as a whole. If you are footnoting specific facts or quotations, the number should appear just after the facts or quoted material. If you are footnoting a general idea or opinion, place the number at the end of the paragraph or paragraphs that discuss it. All footnote numbers should be placed a half space above the line of typing. The number should not be put in parentheses and should be inserted after any punctuation (except a dash).
Some writers put their footnotes at the bottom of the page. This is the form used in many of the books you will use in your research. It is easier for the reader, but it creates problems for the typist, who must judge how much space to leave at the bottom of the page. An easier form, and one that is acceptable to most instructors, is to put all the footnotes at the end of the paper. If you use this method, you must number your footnotes consecutively throughout the work and write them on a separate piece of paper as you compose the rough draft.
Footnote Form.The footnote form illustrated here is a simplified one geared to beginning students.5 If you have sources that do not fit into these rules, you can check a more advanced manual such as Kate L. Turabian, Student's Guide for Writing College Papers. There are two basic forms for writing footnotes, one for books and one for articles:
Crane Brinton, A Decade of Revolution 1789-1799 (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1934), pp. 18-22.
Author’s name in full, followed by a comma.
Title in full, underlined.
Publication information (enclosed in parentheses and followed by a comma): place of publication, followed by a colon; name of publisher, followed by a comma; date of publication.
Page or pages cited, followed by a period.
Some book footnotes are more complex. If a book has several authors, or if it has a translator or editor, or was published in several volumes or editions, then the footnote has to include such information. For example:
xXT. W. Wallbank and A. M. Taylor, Civilization Past andPresent. 2 vols., rev. ed. (Chicago: Scott, Foresman, 1954), 2:12, 104-117.
Note that when there are two authors, both are listed. If there are more than three authors, the footnote includes the name of the one listed first in the book followed by “et al.” (“and others”). If there is more than one volume to a work, the total number of volumes must be specified and inserted after the title. The number of the specific volume used is placed before the page numbers and is separated from them by a colon. If the particular book used is a later edition of the work, that too is inserted after the title. Note also from the example that pages from two different parts of the same book can be covered in one footnote. If there is an editor or translator, that person’s name, followed by “ed.” or “trans.,” appears in the place reserved for the author’s name:
'Eugene C. Black, ed., Posture of Europe 1815-1940 (Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press, 1964), p. 102.
'Dana F. Fleming, “The Role of the Senate in Treaty Making,” American Political Science Review, XXVIII (August 1934), p. 583.
Title of article, followed by a comma, all in quotation marks.
Title of periodical (journal or magazine), underlined and followed by a comma.
Volume number in either Roman (XIV) or Arabic (vol. 14) numerals, date in parentheses, followed by a comma.
Page or pages cited, followed by a period.
If the article is an editorial or has no author, the footnote begins with the name of the article:
'“America’s Interest in the Cuban Economy,” Barrons, XVI (January 20, 1936), p. 9.
This form is common for popular magazines, editorials, and many newspaper articles.
For specialized sources such as unpublished materials, book reviews, microfilm, speeches, dissertations, interviews, government documents, private correspondence, and radio or television programs, see a more specialized book, such as Turabian.6
A final rule about footnotes regards second references to the same source. If you refer to a particular book or article in more than one footnote, only the first reference has to have all of the information. The second reference to the same book need include only the author’s last name and the page number.7 If your first footnote read
'Robert F. Kennedy, Thirteen Days (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1969), p. 14.
your second and later references would read simply
’Kennedy, p. 123.
Kennedy, p. 168.
If, however, you are also referring to other books or articles by Robert Kennedy, you will have to repeat the title so your reader knows to which material you are referring.
The second time you refer to an article, you need to repeat only
the name of the author and the page.126 Thus if your first footnote to an article read
'Julius W. Pratt, “American Business and the Spanish- American War,” Hispanic American Historical Review, XIV (May 1934), pp. 184-187.
your second and later references would read simply
“Pratt, pp. 189-191.
Again, if you are also referring to another article or book by Pratt, later references will have to include the name of the book or article.
Whenever you write a footnote, ask yourself: is it clear to the reader exactly which source I am referring to, and does that reader have enough information to find that source if necessary?
Here is a sample series of footnotes illustrating the various rules discussed above:
'Charles Stanforth, The Study of History (New York: Crown, 1961), pp. 42, 122-127.
2CIeveIand Roland, "Machiavelli and Modem History,” Journal of the Philosophy of History, XIV (February 1949), p. 49.
Encyclopedia of Historical Science, 2nd ed., “Whig Interpretation of History,” by Rudolph Klein.
Encyclopedia of Historical Science, “Calvinism,” by Nancy Ring Brenner.
5Charles Stanforth, Cyclical Theory in Arnold Toynbee (London:
Greath & Sons, 1950), p. 42, This view is also held, though less dogmatically, by Norman Parton, Ancient and Modern Thinking (London: Fernival & Ashwood, 1956), pp. 98-106.
^‘Historians at War Again,” Los Angeles Dispatch, January 14,
1969, sec. B, p. 2.
7Michelle Arnold and Dana Swope, eds., New Trends in Historiography (Philadelphia: Claxton, 1972), p. 104.
8Stanforth, Cyclical Theory, p. 14.
9Roland, p. 50.
Explanation of footnote citations:
Footnote 1: Book; first citation.
2: Article; first citation.
3: Reference work. Author and publisher not needed; edition or date of publication is needed; title and author (if mentioned) of article congee footnote 5.
suited; volume and page number not needed because of alphabetical arrangement of work.
4: Reference work; second citation but to different article.
5: Book, first citation (even though author was previously mentioned in footnote 1). Note that you can refer to more than one source in a footnote as long as you explain your reason for doing so.
6: Newspaper article.
7: Book; multiple authors or editors.
8: Book; second citation. Short title needed because two different works by this author were previously cited.
9: Article; second citation. No short title needed because no other work by this author is cited.
What to Quote. Don’t quote too often, and don’t make quotations too long. Many students tend to rely on other people’s words more than necessary. Unless the exact words of your source are crucial to making an important point, or unless great controversy surrounds the statement, it is not necessary to use a quotation. In most cases a paraphrase or summary of the statement, properly footnoted, is sufficient. If you do quote, be sure to quote enough of the original statement to make its meaning clear, but do not make the quotations any longer than necessary. Remember that a quotation must clearly be labeled as such and the speaker clearly identified.
Quotation Form. If a quotation is brief, taking up no more than two or three lines of your paper, then it should be written as a part of the text and surrounded by quotation marks. You should introduce the quotation by clearly identifying the speaker. The reader will always want to know who is speaking and in what context. Don’t say: The strikers were “a dangerous mob.” Say: According to D. H. Dyson, the plant manager, the strikers were “a dangerous mob.” If you do not wish to quote a whole statement, it is necessary to indicate those parts that you are leaving out by inserting ellipses (three periods “ . . .”) wherever words are missing. (See example below.)
If your quotation is very long, it must be separated from the sentences that precede and follow it. It should be indented ten or more spaces and appear in single-spaced type. Do not surround it with quotation marks.
Short quotation example:
The early settlers were not hostile to the Indians. As pointed out by the Claxton Banner in 1836: “Our Sioux neighbors, despite their fierce reputation, are a friendly and peaceable people.”
Short quotation example with omission:
As pointed out by the Claxton Banner in 1836: “Our Sioux neighbors . . . are a friendly and peaceable people.”
Long quotation example:
The early settlers were not hostile to the Indians. As pointed out by the Claxton Banner in 1836:
Our Sioux neighbors, despite their fierce reputation, are a friendly and peaceable people. No livestock have been disturbed, and the outermost cabins are unmolested. We trust in God that our two peoples may live in harmony in this territory.
It is also possible to insert quoted material in the middle of a sentence (for example, the Prime Minister favored the proposal, but the Foreign Secretary felt it to be “a most dangerous course to pursue,” and urged its rejection). In most cases like this, however, a paraphrase is preferable to a quotation. (The Prime Minister favored the proposal, but the Foreign Secretary considered it dangerous and urged its rejection.) Whether you choose to quote or paraphrase, all such references must be footnoted.7
Organizing a Bibliography
A bibliography is an alphabetical listing of the sources you used in writing your paper.8 The list should appear on a separate page or pages at the end of the paper. If the bibliography is long, say more than twenty sources, it should be divided into three catego-
7If a portion of the material you are quoting is in italics (e.g., New York Times), you should underline these words when you type them (e.g., New York Times).
8It must include all those sources that appear in footnotes. You need not list every source you looked at in the course of your research. Don’t pad the bibliography just to make it look more impressive.
ries: (1) primary sources and documents, (2) books, and (3) articles. The sources are listed alphabetically according to the last name of the author. The form for a book is
Link, Arthur S. Woodrow Wilson and the Progressive Era. New York: Harper & Row, 1954.
Author, last name first, followed by a period.
Title of work, underlined, followed by a period.
Place of publication, followed by a colon.
Publisher, followed by a comma.
Date of publication, followed by a period.
The form for articles is
Bettman, Irwin. “The Beet Sugar Industry: A Study in Tariff Protection.” Harvard Business Review. XI (April 1933), pp. 369-378.
Author, last name first, followed by a period.
Title of article, followed by a period, all in quotation marks.
Name of the periodical, underlined, followed by a period.
Volume number, followed by date in parentheses, followed by a comma.
Pages on which the article begins and ends, followed by a period.
If there is more than one author, the citation is alphabetized according to the last name of the first author mentioned on the title page of the work. That name is then followed by all the others, again with last names first. If there is more than one work by a particular author, only the first listing in the bibliography carries the author’s name. All the rest begin with an eight-space underline in place of the name. As with footnotes, if the author is the translator or editor, or if there is more than one volume, these must be noted. If a book is anonymous, it is listed in alphabetical order, by its title. If an article has no author, it is listed, in alphabetical order, by the title of the article. If you have used many volumes of a particular periodical or many issues of a particular newspaper, you need not list each one separately in your bibliography. They should appear, listed by the name of the periodical or newspaper, as follows:
Monthly Labor Review. Vols. XL-LXX. Washington: United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1940-1957.
New York Times. 1954-1958.
The rules governing bibliographical citations for primary documents can be complicated. The best system is to copy the information exactly as it appears in the card catalog.
Here is a sample bibliography illustrating the rules discussed above. It is drawn from the series of footnotes appearing on page 106. Note that in the footnote series the first line was indented, while in the bibliography it is the second and subsequent lines that are indented.
Arnold, Michelle and Swope, Dana, eds. New Trends in Historiography. Philadelphia: Claxton, 1972.
Encyclopedia of Historical Science,2nd ed. “Calvinism” by Nancy Ring Brenner.
. “Whig Interpretation of History” by Rudolph
“Historians at War Again. ” Los Angeles Dispatch,January 14, 1969.
Parton, Norman. Ancient and Modern Thinking.London: Fernival & Ashwood, 1956.
Roland, Cleveland. “Machiavelli and Modern History.” Journal of the Philosophy of History.XIV (February 1949), 46-60.
Stanforth, Charles. Cyclical Theory in Arnold Toynbee. London: Greath & Sons, 1950.
. The Study of History. New York: Crown, 1961.
Revising and Rewriting
Leave time for revising your paper. The process of putting together the research and writing of a history paper is complex, and your first draft will need smoothing out. As you prepare the final draft, check your paper for the following: (1) Does the paper have thematic unity and do its parts follow one from the other? (2) Is there adequate support for the major assertions of fact and interpretation? (3) Are the points made clearly and forcefully? You must also check the mechanics of your paper, especially spelling and grammar. If your paper is typewritten, check for typographical errors, and make all corrections cleanly and clearly. Reading the
paper aloud will help you to catch poor sentence construction and awkward phrases.
Preparing your final draft involves knowledge of the rules of typing style. Make sure that all pages are numbered consecutively, that the sections or chapters are clearly delineated, and that the footnotes and bibliography are clearly separated from the text and neatly organized. If your paper contains additional material such as appendices, graphs, charts, drawings, photographs, or maps, these too must be clearly labeled and separated from the text. If there are many such materials, your paper should contain a table of contents that lists them. Last of all, choose a title for your paper— one that clearly and accurately reflects its contents.
Choose a medium- or heavy-weight paper for your final copy. It is wise to make a copy of your work in case part or all of the original is lost. Leave at least an inch margin on all sides. (Sometimes an inch and a half on the left margin is preferable.) DoubleSpace the text except for long quotations and footnotes. Give each page a consecutive number in the upper right-hand corner. Prepare a separate title page that includes the title (underlined) and your full name. Also include any information that may be needed to identify the work, such as the name and number of the course, the day and time of meeting or section number, the instructor’s name, and the date. Check with your instructor for specific instructions.appendix
Basic Reference Sources for History Study and Research
This appendix can be used as a supplement to the reference collection of your school library.8 To aid you in your research, the sources are separated according to the kind of information they contain, and, where appropriate, they are organized according to area or subject. This should be particularly valuable in locating sources as you begin your study of a particular subject. If you have no initial leads on relevant material, or if you are unsatisfied with the sources you have uncovered, the works listed here may enable you to find pertinent facts and historical works.
The reference sources cited here are especially designed for historical research. Two kinds of works are listed: reference books, which contain summary or statistical historical information, and bibliographies, which contain lists of historical works on particular
'For information on how to use reference sources in the library, see pages 64-70.
periods or subjects. Reference books (dictionaries, encyclopedias, biography collections, etc.) are useful for obtaining specific facts or for organizing a general outline of your subject. Bibliographies do not themselves contain historical information but rather are collections of history works on a particular topic.
The purpose of this appendix is to facilitate your search for relevant historical facts and history books. Because it is organized with the needs of the beginning student in mind, it may be easier to use than the reference catalog in your school library. It is therefore a good place to begin your research. However, as stated before, it is meant as a supplement rather than as a substitute for your library’s reference catalog. Many of the works cited here should be available in a good college or public library, but some, particularly the specialized bibliographies, may not be. If a book is listed here that you believe is valuable for your research but it is not in your library’s reference catalog, try another library or find a comparable work that your library does possess. On the other hand, if your library is large, its reference catalog will have many more sources than are listed in this appendix, and you should treat these listings as only a first step in your research.
Within each group of sources, those that should be found in most library reference collections or that are particularly useful to beginning students are designated by an asterisk (9). Works without an asterisk are less likely to be available at smaller libraries and are generally designed for the use of advanced students and professionals. If any of the latter should be available, however, you may find them valuable in your research.
The books in this appendix are listed by title first so that you can easily sight the volume that seems closest to your topic. Following the title is the publication information and then the name of the editor or compiler. When looking up one of these works in a reference catalog, check first under the name of the editor or compiler. If the book is not listed there, it may be filed under the title of the work or possibly the publisher. When there is more than one edition of a work, use the most recent.
subject, locate geographical areas, obtain statistical data, and much more. These sources are a good point at which to begin any historical investigation. You can also consult them for specific facts. However, these sources do not contain serious developments or interpretations of historical subjects, and therefore you should not depend upon them for the substance of your work.